insanity workout Collective land ownership system

lin06900

System of collective land ownership

[Abstract] the current legal system of rural collective land of all the problems there, in the final analysis because of its imperfections caused by the main system, the system must pay attention to the research subject. Should insist on collective land ownership based on the improvement of their conduct. Collective land ownership is a new total, the operation of the mechanism of its powers should not intervene by the village committee.
[Key words] usufructuary corporate ownership total there are always new civil subject
The significance of a study of the system
(A) of the current status of rural land ownership system
\collective ownership of rural land. \are rural peasant collectives. \. \From this main body of rural collective ownership of land is owned by peasant collectives, in law there are three types: village peasant collective, township (town) farmers group, the village agricultural collective economic organizations of farmers within the collective.
(B) of the defect and analysis
By the laws listed above we can see the main body of rural collective ownership of the land is owned by peasant collectives, rather than some scholars have said the collective economic organizations [1]. But the law is not strict, what collective? Law does not define. What is the collective? The law only requires the collective economic organizations or village committee management. This qualitative gap with the simple exercise of the right rough constraints led to totalitarian generation. In practice, land nominally collectively owned by farmers, in fact, the collective economic organizations or villagers committees of all, even by which individuals of all, farmers can not legally see their relationship to land. This will allow the farmer is the collective economic organizations or villagers committees contract dispute can not be tangent to claim their legitimate rights and interests, on the other hand also the protection of farmers has weakened the sense of the land, the land uncultivated, is indifferent to the phenomenon of erosion. The collective economic organization or villagers committee leaders have no land collectively owned by farmers the concept of free to tear up the contract, interference free operation of agricultural land, even land without permission. These acts are not conducive to agricultural development, ultimately damaging the interests of farmers, which all are derived from the collective good qualitative 上 legal gaps and the operating mechanism of the simple right rough regulation, it must improve the subject system of collective land ownership.
(C) two points
1 of the main system help to improve the content of collective land ownership status of incomplete. Land is an important property is also an important natural resource, the state to restrict their rights is necessary, but limit the spread of open country in our country has come in the right to use the proceeds and dispose of power obviously have the right to reject the existence of collective land management, state land ownership tend to [2]. I think this is collective land ownership system is directly related to the imperfect, is because the main system, the various defects in the law, in practice many shortcomings greatly limit the power play of their ownership, their ability to self-doubt of private law, the State will be strong public right to intervene on behalf of its almost everything,insanity workout, but when we clear the nature of collective power to improve the operation mechanism of their rights, can guarantee the right to exercise the right to ensure the integrity of the content right.
2 \Some scholars have advocated the reform should focus on rural land in usufruct to improve on, but should not dwell on the collective land ownership, as is the purpose of reform is to better realize the value of collective land use,p90x workout schedule, development of property law trend is also attributable to the use from [3]. I think that the use is certainly very important, but ownership can not talk about. Information ownership is established based on usufruct, ownership of the main system is not perfect will directly affect the function of usufructuary right to play. Imagine if the ownership of the main unknown, unclear ownership, usufruct how to set up? Who set up? On the subject of ownership is a prerequisite condition, only the symptoms can take from the main system.
Two current system of collective land ownership reform, several perspectives
(1) privatization
Advocated this view of collective land transferred to individual farmers of all, the only way to really inspire the enthusiasm of the farmers produce only contribute to agricultural land, large-scale operation. I do not agree with this idea, because I think no matter how great the advantages of privatization, it first runs counter to China's political system. The establishment of the socialist public ownership is the basis of three major reforms have been completed, of which an important part of the socialist transformation of agriculture is to change the private land for the collective farmers and collective land ownership is an important part of the socialist public ownership. Collective land to private farmers will be the same as in the shake-public, know of any system changes are required in the current political and economic system of tolerance, the \[4]. the socialist system has itself declared the death of any land privatization advocates.
(B) the nationalization
This view advocated abolition of collective land ownership, a nationwide unified state ownership of land on the grounds that the current issue of collective land ownership loopholes continue, as cancellation, full control of intervention by the state's power . I think this view is wrong for the following reasons: First, nationalization means what? Is paid or unpaid levy to buy? If paid to purchase, need to pay huge sums of money, subject to national constraints, the country is bound to afford; if unpaid levy, farmers will lead to dissatisfaction, most likely lead to social unrest. [5] Second, how to manage? Country, after all, is an abstract subject, after nationalization, the state need to manage the land through community-based organizations, and in communities where there is no ownership, community-based organizations better able than the present existence and operation of questionable [6].
(C) the improvement of collective
This view advocates insist on the basis of collective land ownership reform of this system. I agree with this view. The following reasons: First,p90x on sale, new institutional economics theory tells us that the path between the old and the new law dependencies, no system has a kind of inertia, the inertia of the legal system strongly restricts the law change, institutional change, once set foot on a certain path, it will set the direction of future development be strengthened. As North said: \is essential, and therefore, we thought we had to return to the reform of rural collective land ownership system reconstruction up, it can be said that this is a Legislative Council the lowest cost path, which reduces the friction costs of old and new systems, reduce system changes in costs and avoid the risks of reform [7]. The cost of the nationalization of the path changes, including the cost of legislative amendments, the peasants against the cost, efficiency losses, policy instability leads to lower costs, their enthusiasm, the cost of privatization, including legislative amendments change the path cost of public ownership shaken lead to political risk costs, cost polarization [8]. Secondly, in theory, a right of revolution is actually an interest redistribution, if the interests of the losers too, is bound to step up reform costs, particularly land ownership, its subject is the most important for any society, basic property, land ownership changes often lead to intense social turmoil, so the change of collective land ownership must be cautious, and seek in the perfect sound [9 ]. nationalization,rosetta stone, privatization advocates clearly does not meet this requirement.
3 the nature of collective land ownership
(A) to study the significance of the nature of collective land ownership
Since it is insisting on collective land ownership, they must answer what is collective, what is the collective ownership and other issues. And other collective forms of ownership is not the same, It is not a personal private, not equal to all legal persons or unincorporated body, because the concept of collective sense of China and France are not strictly the concept of a civil body and also unnecessary . Collective ownership is not a general sense of the common and the press were there, because ultimately the two there is a personal private. Therefore it is necessary to conduct a special analysis of the collective of all, to define its nature. The nature of collective land ownership and collective land ownership is closely linked with the definition of the nature of property ownership is in fact the clear on the subject of rights,mac beauty powder, to clarify the nature of ownership, the vesting of title subject to a clear understanding the right to further discuss how to exercise.
In rural areas, land is the lifeblood of farmers, but all the land not by individual farmers but by peasant collectives, then the farmers in this collective position of all how? How to play the role? Answers to these questions will depend on the collective nature of the analysis. We must safeguard the interests of farmers from the maximum angle of the right to collective ownership of property to the appropriate qualitative; also the only clear the nature of property ownership in order to design rational of Ownership. In the discussion below, we will find that the nature of collective ownership of land that farmers in this system has a pivotal position and peasants who are the collective ownership of land. With this characterization, with this awareness, we have the right to operate in the design of mechanisms, in the development of all relevant policies and regulations, will really take into account the interests of farmers.
(B) of collective land ownership on some understanding of nature
1 legal ownership of the view that the collective as a legal person, collective land is part of corporate property, collective land ownership is a form of corporate ownership. This actually is a modern legal system to explain the current situation of rural collective land [10]. I think that the modern corporate governance mechanisms on the operation of collective land ownership has some reference, but by no means a collective land ownership, corporate ownership, which First of all, is not realistic, collective land of all is a range of work by the masses to enjoy Suoyou Quan Gong Tong, this shared pool of Tuanti Xing not enough to produce an enjoys independent legal personality of Faren's Cengmian Shang, and the company is Caichanjuebu shared by its members or shareholders, but by a separate corporate right [11]; Second, this characterization means that land is the legal person \years, most likely lead to the totalitarian collective legal [12], no matter how perfect the mechanism of checks and balances of power, farmers can not really fight against the collective, because ownership in the hands of the collective rather than farmers, such defects would be to qualitatively mechanism of power inherent in the protection of the interests of farmers on.
2 new ownership group, said that view would be seen as a new type of civil subject, following the natural legal unincorporated body that appears after the fourth class of the civil subject, but also the collective land ownership become a new type of ownership [13]. I do not agree to this view, reasons are: first, the group upgraded to a new civil subject in terms of both theory and practice seemed to rush [14]; second, still land and farmers will be artificially segregated, not conducive to the protection of the interests of farmers.
More articles related to topics：

MAC Cosmetics Cheap Of intellectual property law i

tory burch on sale China and the EU anti-dumping l

MAC Cosmetics Cheap Elimination of bud worm _2237